You are on page 1of 4

Stomatologija, Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal, 11: 66-69, 2009

Evaluation of tensile strength of different configurations of


orthodontic retraction loops for obtaining optimized forces
Miceli Beck Guimaraes Blaya, Graziela Henriques Westphalen, Magali Beck Guimaraes,
Luciana Mayumi Hirakata

SUMMARY

The aim of this study was to analyze the mechanical behavior of different orthodontic retraction loops.
Two designs of orthodontic loops for closing space were analyzed: teardrop-shaped (T) and circle-shaped
loop (C), of two different heights (6 and 8 mm), and two types of orthodontic wires (stainless steel 0.19
0.25; TMA titanium molybdenum alloy 0.016 0.016). The sample consisted of 80 loops, divided
into 8 groups determined by the combination shape/height/type of wire, which were submitted to tensile
testing at a speed of 2 mm/min., to measure the quantity of force generated when activated in the interval
of 0.75 mm and 2.25 mm. The results were submitted to the ANOVA and Tukey statistical tests to com-
pare the groups, and the Students-t test to compare the means of two groups. Statistically higher values
were observed for the size 6 mm, circle shape and stainless steel composition. The group teardrop-8
mm-TMA together with the group circle-8 mm-TMA presented the lowest mean value, differing sta-
tistically from all of the other groups. It was concluded that the alloy of the wire and the height of the loop
would be more important than the loop design.

Key words: orthodontics, orthodontic loop, retraction.

INTRODUCTION

Since the 1940s, orthodontists, such as Tweed and alloy used, type of movement desired and the quantity
Strang, in disagreement with the non extractionist of force necessary. When using loops for closing spaces,
theory adopted by Angle, began to reco mmend a new it is of the utmost importance for the professional to
treatment alternative within orthodontic planning, includ- determine precisely the system of forces generated; that
ing the extraction of teeth [1]. Thus, it was also neces- is, it is important for the orthodontist to know the magni-
sary to develop more effective methods for closing re- tude of the forces and the moments released when these
sidual spaces resulting from these extractions [2,3,4]. devices are activated [5].
Several orthodontic mechanisms were designed for When used in an improper manner, orthodontic loops
closing spaces. Among the various devices described, for closing spaces could cause unfortunate effects, such
there are many ranges of loops, which may be used, as: undesirable loss of anchorage, excessive verticalization
incorporated into continuous or segmented arches, for of the anterior teeth, root resorbtions, or other. These ef-
dental movement. Due to the large number of options, a fects, in addition to increasing the time of treatment, may
great deal of attention must be paid when selecting the also cause irreversible damage to patients [6].
most appropriate model for each case. In this choice, Among the advantages of closing spaces with the
certain variables must be analyzed, among them the loop use of retraction loops is obtaining better control of
design, it quantity of activation, wire thickness, the metal anchorage, provided by incorporating pre-activation
folds of different intensities into the anterior and pos-
terior extremities of the loops, as well as by positioning
*
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
them in the inter-bracket distances [7].
Miceli Beck Guimaraes Blaya* D.D.S, PhD Student In this context, three basic properties can be con-
Graziela Henriques Westphalen* D.D.S, M.S., PhD Student
Magali Beck Guimaraes* D.D.S, M.S. Student sidered for characterizing space closing loops: (1) the
Luciana Mayumi Hirakata* D.D.S, M.S., PhD, Dental Material proportion moment/force (M/F), which determines the
Professor.
center of dental rotation and thus enables root control
Address correspondence to Dr. Luciana Mayumi Hirakata, Av. during the movement of the teeth; (2) the horizontal
Ipiranga, 6681 - Building 6, Porto Alegre Rio Grande do Sul, force produced during loop activation and (3) the load/
Brazil, Zip code: 90619-900.
E-mail: lucianahirakata@yahoo.com.br deflection ratio, which defines the amount and decrease

66 Stomatologija, Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 2
of the force systems delivered by these 3 loop configura-
tions for both stainless steel and titanium molybdenium al-
loy (TMA) for first-order corrections. All the specimens
had nominal cross-sections of 0.017 0.025. The authors
Fig. 1. Demonstration of teardrop loop made on millimetric concluded that correction of first-order discrepancies was
paper jigs
best accomplished using rectangular loops.
More recently, Coimbra et al [11] performed an in
B
vitro study with a mechanical testing and finite ele-
ment analysis of orthodontic teardrop loop and the re-
sults was that the use of teardrop loops of different
heights should be considered an alternative for design-
ing orthodontic appliances before treatment.
The aim of this study was to analyze the mechani-
cal behavior under tensile tests, of different shaped re-
traction loops, various orthodontic wires compositions
A C
and widths; and determine, within the variables ana-
lyzed, which of them most influence the system of forces.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two designs of orthodontic loops for closing space


were analyzed: teardrop-shaped (T) and circle-shaped
loop (C), of two different heights (6 and 8 mm), and
two types of orthodontic wires (stainless steel 0.19
0.25; TMA titanium molybdenum alloy 0.016
0.016). The sample consisted of 80 loops, divided into
8 groups determined according to the interaction shape/
height/type of wire (Table 1).
In order to uniform the shape and dimension of
Fig. 2. Demonstration of arches made on millimetric paper jigs the loops when making the tests specimens of the same
subgroup, jigs were made of millimeter paper (Figures
in force at each millimeter of deactivation [8]. 1 and 2).
Vanderby et al [9] performed an experimental study The sample was submitted to tensile testing in a
of vertically activated orthodontic loops. They consid- universal mechanical test machine EMIC DL 2000 (So
ered T, L, and rectangular configurations designed for Jos dos Campos, SP, Brazil), at a speed of 2 mm/min,
an interbracket distance of 7 mm. The material used to measure the quantity of force generated with the
was 0.010 0.021 stainless steel wires. They sug- loops are activated in the interval of 0.75 mm to 2.25
gested that the forces and moments generated by the mm. The values obtained were disposed in Tables and
stainless steel loops were sensitive to small inaccura- Graphs, from which statistical analysis was performed.
cies during loop fabrication. The comparison among groups was carried out
Menghi et al [10] studied R, L e T- loops experimen- by using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukeys
tally with a view to establishing a 3-dimensional description multiple comparison tests. For comparison of the means
of the variables height, type of wire and shape, the
Table 1. Division of the groups Students-t test was performed. To process and ana-
lyze these data, the statistical software SPSS version
Group Shape Width ( mm) Type of Wire Sample
10.0 was used. A level of significance used to deter-
(n)
G1 T 6 TMA 10 mine the differences between the groups were 1%.
G2 T 8 TMA 10
G3 T 6 Stainless steel 10 RESULTS
G4 T 8 Stainless steel 10
G5 C 6 TMA 10
G6 C 8 TMA 10 It was verified that there was significant differ-
G7 C 6 Stainless steel 10 ence among the groups compared (ANOVA). By the
G8 C 8 Stainless steel 10 Tukeys test it was observed that G7 presented a higher
T teardrop-shaped loop; C Circle-shaped loop. mean, differing from all the other groups; G3 came

Stomatologija, Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 2 67
Fig. 3. Results of the comparison among the 8 study groups (in ascending order)

next, and did not differ from G4 and G 8. There was deflection ratio than a loop with the same configura-
no significant difference between G1 and G5 and be- tion, made of stainless steel [12]. Although the vari-
tween G2 and G6 (Table 1, Figures 3). able alloy of the wire had been evaluated in isolation,
The Students-t test revealed statistically signifi- and no significant difference had been found, the in-
cant difference when the variables were analyzed in teraction among the variables of this study show that
isolation (Figures 4). the wire alloy could influence the results, favoring the
application of greater heights to provide smaller forces
DISCUSSION during the retraction phase of anterior teeth.
For many years, stainless steel was one of the most
In this study, after the mechanical test, the circle- important materials for orthodontic arches [13]. How-
shaped and teardrop-8 mm-TMA groups showed the ever, since the early 1960s, researches in the clinical ap-
lowest mean values, differing statistically from the plicability of titanium as a structural metal for the compo-
groups that were 6 mm high. Although there was no sition of wires began to be conducted. Titanium wires,
statistical difference when the variable height was also known as TMA (Titanium Molybdenum Alloy) be-
evaluated in isolation, in conjunction with other char- cause they have approximately 11.3% of molybdenum in
acteristics a lower height could generate greater re- their composition, have all the properties of a wire said to
sults, according to this study. be superior: high elastic recovery, lower rigidity of the
This can be explained if one takes into consider- arch and high formability, in addition to being able to re-
ation that changing the metal alloy used for making the ceive welding, without reducing its resilience, and being
loop can alter the load/deflection ratio. Therefore, a resistant to corrosion. They have elastic recovery supe-
loop constituted of an alloy with a low elastic modulus, rior to that of stainless steel, and can be flexed twice as
such as titanium-molybdenum, would have a lower load/ much as stainless steel, without deforming permanently.
Furthermore, they release forces
Table 2. Comparison between Class II and Class III for right and left side (p0.05) that correspond to approximately
half of the forces released by steel
Group n Mean (N)* Standard F p
alloys for the same activation. Their
Deviation (N)
Teardrop-8 mm-TMA 10 3.10 A
0.58 37.85 <0.01 high formability allows them to be
Circle-8 mm-TMA 10 4.10 AB 0.65 conformed into various and com-
Teardrop-6 mm-TMA 10 4.88 BC 1.00 plex loop configurations [14, 15, 16].
Circle-6 mm-TMA 10 6.00C 2.21
Nevertheless, Burnstone and
Teardrop-8 mm-Stainless steel 10 6.41CD 0.77
Circle-8 mm-Stainless steel 10 6.93 CD
0.68 Goldberg (1980) [17] do not reco
Teardrop-6 mm-Stainless steel 10 7.85 D 1.87 mmend folds at acute angles for
Circle-6 mm-Stainless steel 10 10.70 E 0.82 these alloys, affirming that making
NS the difference is not statistically significant. complicated loops to reduce the ri-

68 Stomatologija, Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 2
Fig. 4. Results of the comparison among the study variables

gidity of stainless steel alloys is not necessary for TMA CONCLUSIONS


wires. This could not be proved in the present study, as
there was statistically significant difference among the According to the study, it was concluded that the
groups of stainless steel alloy and those of TMA, sug- alloy of the wire and the height of the loop would be more
gesting that one could insert folds in this type of alloy and important than the loop design, for the purpose of obtain-
that it would even further improve the force generated by ing smaller biologic forces. The circle- and teardrop-
these types of loops for retraction. shaped loops, made of TMA, presented the lowest val-
The tensile test serves to predict the behavior of ues during the tensile test used. Nevertheless, the results
certain dental materials during their use [18]. In this of an in vitro study must be analyzed with caution, which
study, this trial was used as the one that best simulates leads to the necessity of more studies to clarify and de-
the forces generated during retraction in mass of the fine specific protocols for the use of retraction loops that
anterior teeth, in the case of closing spaces. bring greater advantages in clinical practice.

REFERENCES
1. Burstone CJ, Koenig HA.Force systems from an ideal arch. 10. Menghi C, Planert J, Mensen B. 3-D experimental identifica-
Am J Orthod 1974; 70:1-19. tion of force systems from orthodontic loops activated for
2. Nanda R, Diaz M. Orthodontic space closure. Dent Clin North first order corrections. Angle Orthod 1999;69:49-57.
Am 1981;25:95-107. 11. Coimbra MER, Penedo ND, Gouva JP, Elias CN, Arajo
3. Proffit WR. Ortodontia Contempornea. 3th ed. Rio de Janeiro: MTS, Coelho PG. Mechanical testing and finite element analy-
Guanabara Koogan; 2002. sis of orthodontic teardrop loop. Am J Orthod Dentofacial
4. Shimizu RH. Fechamento de espaos aps exodontias de Orthop 2008;133:188.e9-188.e13.
primeiros pr-molares. [dissertao (Mestrado) Faculdade de 12. Schillai G, Lehmann KM. Untersuchung ber die Beziehung
Odontologia]. Araraquara Universidade Estadual Paulista; 1995. zwischen Aktivierungskraft und Auslenkung bei versciedenen
5. Menezes L, Thesen G, Rego MVNN, Shimizu RH. A utilizao Zahnzugfedern. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1989;50:172-78.
de diferentes configuraes de molas T para a obteno de 13. Kusy RP, Greenberg AR. Effects of composition and cross-
sistemas de fora otimizados. R Dental Press Ortodon Ortop section on elastic properties of orthodontic wires. Angle Orthod
Facial 2006;11:57-77. 1981;51:325-41.
6. Mendes AM, Baggio PE, Bolognese AM. Fechamento de 14. Donovan MT. Weldability of beta titanium arch wires. Am J
espaos. Rev da SBO 1992;2:11-9. Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1984;85:207-16.
7. Kuhlberg AJ, Priebe DN. Space closure and anchorage control. 15. Goldberg AJ, Burstone CJ. Status report on beta-titanium
Semin Orthod 2001;7:42-9. orthodontic wires. J Am Dent Assoc 1982;105:684-5.
8. Burstone CJ. Aplicao da bioengenharia na Ortodontia Clnica. 16. Kapila S, Sachdeva R. Mechanical properties and clinical ap-
In: Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL. Ortodontia: princpios e plications of orthodontic wires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial
tcnicas atuais. 3th ed. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan; Orthop 1989;96:100-9.
2002. p.228-7. 17. Burstone CJ, Goldberg J. Beta Titanium: a new orthodontic
9. Vanderby R, Burstone CJ, Solonche DJ, Ratches JA. Experi- alloy. Am J Orthod 1980;77:121-32.
mentally determined force systems from vertically activated 18. Estrela C. Metodologia Cientfica. So Paulo: Artes Mdicas;
orthodontics loops. Angle Orthod 1977;47:272-9. 2001. 483 p.
Received: 14 10 2008
Accepted for publishing: 19 06 2009

Stomatologija, Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 2 69

You might also like